Søren Kierkegaard ushers in the Kingdom of Heaven by establishing an hierarchy, whereby faith usurps reason as the ultimate monarch of this world. For Kierkegaard, the “absurdity” of faith is the vehicle by which the individual opens the door for God to operate in the human realm. This allows the spiritual reality that “all things are possible” to overcome the perceived impossibilities of our finite world. [1]. Kierkegaard argues, however, that faith creates a moral dilemma for the individual. One must often transgress reason and the established moral order to remain obedient to faith; creating a natural tension between the individual and society which understands God’s Will to be rational and ethical. This is the paradox that Kierkegaard sets out to explain in Fear and Trembling.
Kierkegaard promotes faith as the highest good that humankind can achieve. He enlists the aid of the Father of Skepticism, Descartes, to refute the tenants of strict rationalism:
"What God has revealed to us is incomparably more certain than anything else … we ought to submit to the Divine authority rather than our own judgment even though the light of reason may seem to us to suggest, with the utmost clearness and evidence, something opposite." [2].
For Kierkegaard, the outward world, being the realm of reason, is “subject to the law of imperfection” and “indifference.” [3]. In this kingdom, justice does not always reign supreme; the righteous are not always rewarded for their works, and good does not always triumph over evil. “It is otherwise in the world of spirit. Here there prevails an eternal divine order, here it does not rain on the just and the unjust alike…” [4]. In Kierkegaard’s economy, faith is the courageous act of trust necessary to bridge the gap between the spiritual and the natural worlds, and transcend the boundaries of reason.
Kierkegaard asserts that reason restricts the full expression of the individual by enslaving him to “the ethical as such is the universal, and as the universal it applies to everyone … at every moment.” [5]. However, the requirements of faith often place the individual at odds with the universal:
"As soon as the single individual wants to assert himself in his particularity [expressed through his obedience to the divine will], in direct opposition to the universal, he sins, and only by recognizing this can he again reconcile himself with the universal." [6].
What a conundrum! The individual’s only option is to sin; either by disobedience to God, or by transgression of the ethical. This, for Kierkegaard, represents the paradox of faith.
The Great Dane’s solution is the teleological suspension of the ethical. This simply places the ethical in a subordinate position to the absolute, creating an hierarchy by which the individual is justified in the subjugation of reason through faith. This relationship is exemplified through Kierkegaard’s contrast of the Tragic Hero, and the Knight of Faith.
The Tragic Hero represents the man who is ruled by reason. He is subject to the moral order, and his duty is the Good of the State; justification comes through adherence to the universal, and for him temptation is represented as individuality. The Tragic Hero is beloved by society for his conformity to the universal, and his rejection of self.
The Faithful Knight is the antithesis of the Tragic Hero; he stands in opposition to the universal, and his duty is to the Divine dictate. He is justified through his obedience, and his temptation is represented by the desire to reconcile with the universal. He is a reject of society for his failure to conform to reason or reside within the universal. The Tragic Hero represents the misguided priorities of an imperfect society, while the Knight of Faith is the archetype of the rightly ordered life.
Kierkegaard makes a strong emotional appeal to abandon reason for an unquestioning trust in God. His appeal for the Christian community to embrace a heightened sense of spirituality is diminished, however, by the unguided self-reliance of the individual to determine the will of God. By Kierkegaard’s own admission, The Knight of Faith is subject to error, yet can be counseled by no-one. This places the exercise of faith on a shaky foundation, by placing the individual beyond the reproof of the ethical, while never fully allowing one the security of affirmation by the community that they are within the Divine will.
A strong argument can be made that this kind of spiritual individualism leaves the adherent vulnerable to deception, and could promote the loss of faith. The Knight of Faith, rather than being liberated, is always bound by the possibility that he is operating within his own desires; the outcome being the only evidence of whether or not his path was the correct one. Therefore, the Knight of Faith is posed with a new paradox; he must either sin by seeking the external validation that he is on the correct path (a sign of fear and unbelief), or he must continually forge ahead risking the possibility self-delusion.
by Lawrence Christopher Skufca (2008)
Some Rights Reserved
Bibliography
[1]. Kierkegaard, Søren . 1843. Fear and Trembling. Trans. Alastair Hannay. (London: Penguin Books, 1985). pp. 73.
[2]. Descartes, Rene. 1644. The Philosophical Works of Descartes. Trans. Elizabeth S. Haldane and G.R.T. Ross. (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ Press, 1973). pp. 231 and 252.
[3]. Kierkegaard, Søren . 1843. Fear and Trembling. Trans. Alastair Hannay. (London: Penguin Books, 1985). pp. 57.
[4]. Ibid., p. 57.
[5]. Ibid., p. 84.
[6]. Ibid., p. 83.
No comments:
Post a Comment